The Education Gadfly Weekly

There's a whole new meaning to the idea of a teacher being on his or her game when teaching. Now, in front of a class, or anywhere else in school, teachers may be on camera. Last week, Education Week reported how some students are using camera phones to secretly videotape their teachers (see here). Students post the files online at social networking sites like YouTube and MySpace. Images of teachers being angry or happy, clowning around, and singing or dancing are being captured and distributed widely. I mean, what's with that? Education is in crisis, right? What's to dance about?

Some teachers also may be disturbing the educational process with their own personal web postings. It's unclear how many Ohio teachers have posted online profiles at social networking sites, according to The Columbus Dispatch (see here). But the issue poses risks for teachers, James Miller, director of the Office of Professional Conduct at the Ohio Department of Education, told the newspaper.

A Dispatch MySpace search yielded three profiles of people who say they are teachers, one of whom described herself as an animal in bed, another has taken drugs and likes to party. Pranksters could post the files or they could be legitimate.

If genuine, such postings could get a teacher fired.

As far as students secretly recording their teachers, well it's not reality TV. Students edit the files and add soundtracks to poke fun at teachers or to try and belittle them. In Washington state, a teacher found herself the subject of a video titled "Mongzilla," shot by students in her classroom over several days, which made fun of her appearance.

"It is disturbing to the educational process," David Strom, the general counsel for the American Federation of Teachers, told Education Week. One worry is that the concern over being videotaped could change how teachers interact with students. Or it could deter class participation by students who fear being ridiculed if they ended up raising a hand and answering a question.

While students have the right to make the online postings, laws in several states prohibit the recording of a person without his or her knowledge. What complicates the issue for teachers are some court decisions indicating teachers do not necessarily have privacy rights in the classroom.

Schools that require students to turn off cell phones could discipline students for breaking that rule, Education Week says. In the case of the videotaping of the Washington state teacher, the student was suspended, not for his online posting but for disrupting the classroom.

Pacific Research Institute
October 2007

For anyone who has purchased a home in California or just watched one of the many home-improvement shows featuring modest yet high-priced houses in the Golden State this new release from the Pacific Research Institute (PRI) is sobering. PRI asked just how good the schools really are in those well-heeled California neighborhoods where parents flock-and dole out a lot of cash for houses because of the "quality" of the local schools. The answer: not as good as you think.

The book opens with an overview of student achievement nationally and a quick primer on school choice. Then, PRI gets to the work of examining student achievement in middle-class California school districts, those districts where less than one third of students are eligible for free or reduced lunch, that is, where two thirds of families have incomes of at least 185 percent of the state poverty level. The results are mixed. Most of the schools are mediocre and some are just plain bad.

PRI next looks beyond student achievement with case studies in fiscal mismanagement in affluent districts and analyses of the impact of union contracts, school-board policies, and administrative regulations in the schools. The book also debunks myths about school choice and makes the case for improved accountability systems and expanded school choice.

So what does a book about California's schools mean for Ohio, where middle-class families can still afford homes in good neighborhoods? After all, families here are doubly lucky because our public schools are pretty good, right? More than 80 percent of school districts are rated "excellent" or "effective" by the Ohio Department of Education. This book should make Buckeye State parents and homeowners think twice about the quality of their local schools and the education choices they don't have when district schools don't measure up.

Labor-backed candidates made gains in several school board races last week, notably in Cincinnati, Dayton, and Columbus. Voters also rejected a $327 million property tax levy in Cincinnati, giving the new board there something to think about. This defeat, and the recent levy defeat in Dayton, should give pause to other big districts seeking new spending for their schools. Taxpayers are feeling stressed and they don't believe more money will fix what ails Ohio's urban public schools. Not surprisingly, Fordham's 2007 survey of Ohioan's attitudes toward public education and new spending showed the public's conviction that extra money won't make a difference-fully 71 percent of Ohioans think if districts were to spend more money it "would actually get lost along the way" (see here). The taxpayers are skeptical and they are most skeptical in the big urban districts.

These levy defeats and the election of union-backed school boards in the big cities will also surely result in more pressure on Governor Ted Strickland to "solve" school-funding problems. This is proving a tough sell, and no doubt the fact that the state's poorest districts already get upwards of 80 percent of their student funding from the state and feds makes it harder still.

In discussing his district's levy defeat, Michael Tefs, superintendent of the North Ridgeville district in Summit County, commented to a Cleveland Plain Dealer reporter that voters are frustrated with funding of schools through property taxes (see here). Tefs said the district will now try to figure out what voters will support.

The governor would like to know that, too. Strickland has yet to back up a campaign promise to do something about school funding, although he has succeeded in backtracking on his pledge (see here). Ohio is a high-tax state compared to many of its neighbors, the exceptions being Michigan and West Virginia. Education spending in Ohio has outpaced inflation and increased steadily from about $6,000 per pupil in 1996 to more than $9,300 in 2005, according to the Ohio Department of Education, yet districts keep calling for more money.

The fact of the matter is, however, that the only way to get more money into urban districts is through a Robin Hood strategy of taking more from the wealthier suburban districts. No politician wants to do this in 2008 before a critical election that could see the Ohio House go Democratic. Hence, the Governor's strategy is to bide his time here, and why not? Fully 60 percent of Ohioan's approve of his job as Governor (see here). Why fight this fight now?

Meanwhile, Cincinnati residents Carolyn and Marty Collins told the Cincinnati Enquirer the schools have had enough. "They have had too much money, and they squandered it," Mr. Collins said. "They've had way too much money. I'm done." It was the first time the couple had ever voted against a school levy.

Cincinnati's Superintendent Rosa Blackwell said massive job cuts and deep cuts to sports and transportation could be on the table. These threats often scare voters back into line. We'll see.

Cincinnati voters also threw out an incumbent school board member, breaking up a voting block that has effectively controlled the board since 2006 (see here). In this case, a slate of three union-backed candidates gained seats while one member of a voting block that has controlled the board since 2006 was defeated. All three winners were endorsed by the Democratic Party. Union-backed candidates also won seats in Dayton, prompting the Dayton Daily News to opine that they face difficult choices and now must govern (see here).

In Columbus, voters defeated Jeff Cabot, the Columbus school board's longest-sitting member, replacing him with Gary L. Baker II (see here). Voters returned four Democrat-backed members to the board. Baker also was endorsed by the Democratic Party.

In one notable defeat for labor, voters returned Stephanie Groce to the Columbus board. Groce fell out of favor with local Democratic leaders and lost the party's endorsement for supporting a KIPP charter school opening in Columbus and bidding out some supplemental services to private providers to cut district costs.

"I think people look at me and they see a person who is not afraid to ask tough questions," she told The Columbus Dispatch.

The toughest question of all facing school districts, and the big urban districts feel this heat most, is how they can secure constantly improving performance across their education systems without raising taxes. Too few district leaders and district board members are asking this question. The question is being posed, however, by taxpayers. New board members in Dayton, Cincinnati, and Columbus that are hoping for more state money are apt to be sorely disappointed.

To the west, in Indianapolis the Democratic mayor often referred to as the "Peyton Manning of charter schools" was defeated by Republican Greg Ballard in what some are calling the "biggest upset in Indiana political history" (see here). Mayor Bart Peterson changed the face of education in Indianapolis during his eight years in office. He was the only mayor in the country to serve as a charter school authorizer. In 2006, his office was authorizing 16 charter schools that served over 3,800 students. He instituted a rigorous application process for opening schools, required transparency in academic and fiscal performance of all his sponsored schools, and held schools accountable for results and closed those that failed academically. Crime and rising taxes cost Mayor Peterson his office, but his impact on school reform efforts will be felt for years to come in Indy and beyond. Mayor-elect Ballard has promised to continue the charter school program.

Pacific Research Institute
October 2007

For anyone who has purchased a home in California or just watched one of the many home-improvement shows featuring modest yet high-priced houses in the Golden State this new release from the Pacific Research Institute (PRI) is sobering. PRI asked just how good the schools really are in those well-heeled California neighborhoods where parents flock-and dole out a lot of cash for houses because of the "quality" of the local schools. The answer: not as good as you think.

The book opens with an overview of student achievement nationally and a quick primer on school choice. Then, PRI gets to the work of examining student achievement in middle-class California school districts, those districts where less than one third of students are eligible for free or reduced lunch, that is, where two thirds of families have incomes of at least 185 percent of the state poverty level. The results are mixed. Most of the schools are mediocre and some are just plain bad.

PRI next looks beyond student achievement with case studies in fiscal mismanagement in affluent districts and analyses of the impact of union contracts, school-board policies, and administrative regulations in the schools. The book also debunks myths about school choice and makes the case for improved accountability systems and expanded school choice.

So what does a book about California's schools mean for Ohio, where middle-class families can still afford homes in good neighborhoods? After all, families here are doubly lucky because our public schools are pretty good, right? More than 80 percent of school districts are rated "excellent" or "effective" by the Ohio Department of Education. This book should make Buckeye State parents and homeowners think twice about the quality of their local schools and the education choices they don't have when district schools don't measure up.

There's a whole new meaning to the idea of a teacher being on his or her game when teaching. Now, in front of a class, or anywhere else in school, teachers may be on camera. Last week, Education Week reported how some students are using camera phones to secretly videotape their teachers (see here). Students post the files online at social networking sites like YouTube and MySpace. Images of teachers being angry or happy, clowning around, and singing or dancing are being captured and distributed widely. I mean, what's with that? Education is in crisis, right? What's to dance about?

Some teachers also may be disturbing the educational process with their own personal web postings. It's unclear how many Ohio teachers have posted online profiles at social networking sites, according to The Columbus Dispatch (see here). But the issue poses risks for teachers, James Miller, director of the Office of Professional Conduct at the Ohio Department of Education, told the newspaper.

A Dispatch MySpace search yielded three profiles of people who say they are teachers, one of whom described herself as an animal in bed, another has taken drugs and likes to party. Pranksters could post the files or they could be legitimate.

If genuine, such postings could get a teacher fired.

As far as students secretly recording their teachers, well it's not reality TV. Students edit the files and add soundtracks to poke fun at teachers or to try and belittle them. In Washington state, a teacher found herself the subject of a video titled "Mongzilla," shot by students in her classroom over several days, which made fun of her appearance.

"It is disturbing to the educational process," David Strom, the general counsel for the American Federation of Teachers, told Education Week. One worry is that the concern over being videotaped could change how teachers interact with students. Or it could deter class participation by students who fear being ridiculed if they ended up raising a hand and answering a question.

While students have the right to make the online postings, laws in several states prohibit the recording of a person without his or her knowledge. What complicates the issue for teachers are some court decisions indicating teachers do not necessarily have privacy rights in the classroom.

Schools that require students to turn off cell phones could discipline students for breaking that rule, Education Week says. In the case of the videotaping of the Washington state teacher, the student was suspended, not for his online posting but for disrupting the classroom.